# Einstein's fourth paper in 1905? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 5, 2005, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208 "2005-01-05T16:17:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2005, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/1 "2005-01-05T16:17:20Z")
According to [Wikipedia’s article on Albert Einstein](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_einstein), he wrote four papers in 1905, three of which were generally considered to be Nobel-worthy. Those three were about the photoelectric effect, Brownian motion, and special relativity. What was the fourth one about? ---
**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2005, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/2 "2005-01-05T16:27:15Z")
But the wikipedia article you linked to answers that question: > [@](#): > > A fourth paper, titled “Does the Inertia of a Body Depend Upon Its Energy Content?”, published late in 1905 showed one further deduction from relativity’s axioms, the energy-mass relation, originally written by Einstein as m = E/c2. That deduction, rewritten, was the famous equation that the energy of a body at rest (E) equals its mass (m) times the speed of light © squared: > > E = mc[sup]2[/sup] ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2005, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/3 "2005-01-05T16:31:49Z")
It would seem Wikipedia got it wrong…it looks like only 3 papers were written. > [@](#): > > In the first of three seminal papers that were published in 1905… > > SOURCE: [The 1905 Papers](http://www.humboldt1.com/~gralsto/einstein/1905.html) > [@](#): > > In the first of three papers, all written in 1905… > > SOURCE: [Albert Einstein](http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Einstein.html) > [@](#): > > German-American physicist who, in 1905, published three papers, each of which had a profound effect on the development of physics. > > SOURCE: [http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Einstein.html](http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/biography/Einstein.html) Google on it and you find things like I linked above all over the place and all seem to be in agreement on this point. ---
**Author:** ![Bytegeist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@Bytegeist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bytegeist)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2005, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/4 "2005-01-05T16:43:18Z")
There seem to be four 1905 publications in _Annalen der Physik_ listed in [this PDF document.](http://www.einstein-website.de/z_physics/AEWisPub-04.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2005, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/5 "2005-01-05T17:28:16Z")
A couple of recent books, including [Einstein’s Miraculous Year, by Roger Penrose](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0691059381/qid=1104946192/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-5392588-1419936?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) and some of John Stachel’s works talk about _five_ papers in 1905. > [@](#): > > After 1905, Einstein’s miraculous year, physics would never be the same again. In those twelve months, Einstein shattered many cherished scientific beliefs with five great papers that would establish him as the world’s leading physicist. This book brings those papers together in an accessible format. The best-known papers are the two that founded special relativity: On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies and Does the Inertia of a Body Depend on Its Energy Content? In the former, Einstein showed that absolute time had to be replaced by a new absolute: the speed of light. In the second, he asserted the equivalence of mass and energy, which would lead to the famous formula E = mc2. > > The book also includes On a Heuristic Point of View Concerning the Production and Transformation of Light, in which Einstein challenged the wave theory of light, suggesting that light could also be regarded as a collection of particles. This helped to open the door to a whole new world–that of quantum physics. For ideas in this paper, he won the Nobel Prize in 1921. > > The fourth paper also led to a Nobel Prize, although for another scientist, Jean Perrin. On the Movement of Small Particles Suspended in Stationary Liquids Required by the Molecular-Kinetic Theory of Heat concerns the Brownian motion of such particles. With profound insight, Einstein blended ideas from kinetic theory and classical hydrodynamics to derive an equation for the mean free path of such particles as a function of the time, which Perrin confirmed experimentally. The fifth paper, A New Determination of Molecular Dimensions, was Einstein’s doctoral dissertation, and remains among his most cited articles. It shows how to calculate Avogadro’s number and the size of molecules. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2005, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/6 "2005-01-05T20:54:26Z")
The canonical number is that he wrote the five that are included in _Einstein’s Miraculous Year_ (which I’ll hereby recommend on the SDMB for the second time this week). There is a slight ambiguity to do with the doctoral dissertation on molecular dimensions. This was submitted to the University of Zurich on July 20th 1905 and accepted. He then submitted a slightly revised version to _Annalen der Physik_, who received the manuscript on August 19th. Due to the usual sorts of delays and the production schedule, this paper didn’t actually appear until one of the 1906 issues of the journal. However, the fact that this was submitted, if not actually published, in 1905 means that it’s justifiably traditionally included with the 4 that appeared in that year. Personally, I’d rate any of the five as having been worthy of a Nobel. ---
**Author:** ![Bytegeist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9dc877/32.png) [@Bytegeist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bytegeist)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/7 "2005-01-06T15:54:32Z")
> [@bonzer](#): > > The canonical number is that he wrote the five that are included in _Einstein’s Miraculous Year_ [1905] … Personally, I’d rate any of the five as having been worthy of a Nobel. Often overlooked is Einstein’s _sixth_ publication that year — a mouth-watering collection of holiday recipes for the hostess on a tight budget. (_Collier’s_, special Christmas issue.) Worthy of a Nobel? You might scoff, but have you tried his _Spaetzle Snickerdoodles_? ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/8 "2005-01-06T16:40:57Z")
The papers that introduced Special Relativity and the equivalence of matter and energy to the world weren’t Nobel worthy, but the one on _Brownian Motion_ was?? That Nobel commitee is a tough crowd to please. ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/9 "2005-01-06T18:55:00Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > The papers that introduced Special Relativity and the equivalence of matter and energy to the world weren’t Nobel worthy, but the one on _Brownian Motion_ was?? > > That Nobel commitee is a tough crowd to please. No, it was the one on the photoelectric effect for which he received the Nobel Prize. Relativity was still a political hot potato, so it was a compromise. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/10 "2005-01-06T20:53:51Z")
I can’t find the rules on the Nobel Prize, but it seems a person may only receive one Nobel Prize in their lifetime. If this were not the case, and multiple physics prizes could be given in a single year, how many Nobel Prizes would Einstein reasonably be said to have deserved ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/11 "2005-01-06T22:04:48Z")
> [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > I can’t find the rules on the Nobel Prize, but it seems a person may only receive one Nobel Prize in their lifetime. If this were not the case, and multiple physics prizes could be given in a single year, how many Nobel Prizes would Einstein reasonably be said to have deserved There is no such rule, of course. Madame Curie won two, one in physics, one in chemistry–but John Bardeen won both of his in physics Etc. Einstein did not win the prize in 1905, he won it in 1922. 🙂 And there is a lot of work that he did that hadn’t come to fruition by the time he died (Nobel Prizes are not given posthumously–the usual reason given for Rosalind Franklin not receiving one for DNA). For instance, the Bose-Einstein condensate was theorized, but only achieved in the last ten years–and the ones who did achieve it received a Nobel Prize. And there’s the Einstein-Rosen bridge… ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/12 "2005-01-06T22:07:00Z")
> [@Bippy the Beardless](#): > > I can’t find the rules on the Nobel Prize, but it seems a person may only receive one Nobel Prize in their lifetime. If this were not the case, and multiple physics prizes could be given in a single year, how many Nobel Prizes would Einstein reasonably be said to have deserved No, there have been people (2 or 3, I think) who have received more than one Nobel prize. But they have been in different categories; for example, one for physics and later the Nobel Peace Prize. I don’t know if this is a rule, or just the way the Nobel prize comittee does it. (Actually, since prior Nobel prize winners are asked to recommend possible future winners, it would be sort of a conflict of interest if they could recommend themself.) ---
**Author:** ![Washoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ecae2f/32.png) [@Washoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Washoe)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/13 "2005-01-06T22:16:06Z")
The fact that a person can win more than one Nobel Prize is clearly evidenced by the fact that one of Linus Pauling’s most notable accomplishments is that he is the only person to have received two _unshared_ Nobel Prizes. ---
**Author:** ![Washoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ecae2f/32.png) [@Washoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Washoe)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2005, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/14 "2005-01-06T22:22:10Z")
Sorry, I was being lazy—here’s a [verifying link](http://www.harvardsquarelibrary.org/unitarians/pauling.html). ---
**Author:** ![RM\_Mentock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e274bd/32.png) [@RM\_Mentock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RM_Mentock)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2005, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/15 "2005-01-07T02:01:45Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > No, there have been people (2 or 3, I think) who have received more than one Nobel prize. > > But they have been in different categories; Not always, see the comment about Bardeen ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2005, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/einsteins-fourth-paper-in-1905/283208/16 "2005-01-07T12:05:41Z")
> [@Malodorous](#): > > The papers that introduced Special Relativity and the equivalence of matter and energy to the world weren’t Nobel worthy, but the one on _Brownian Motion_ was?? > > That Nobel commitee is a tough crowd to please. I though the _Brownian Motion_ paper proved the atomicity of matter, which had long been thought unprovable. Seems like a major accomplishment to me.